DOCSLIB.ORG

Title Performance Characteristics of Para Swimmers – How Effective Is the Swimming Classification System?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Title Performance Characteristics of Para Swimmers – How Effective Is the Swimming Classification System? Title Performance characteristics of para swimmers – how effective is the swimming classification system? Authors Brendan Burkett PhD1, Carl Payton PhD2, Peter Van de Vliet PhD3, Hannah Jarvis PhD4 Daniel Daly PhD5, Christiane Mehrkuehler MSc6, Marvin Kilian MSc7 and Luke Hogarth PhD8 1 Professor of Sport Science, School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia. 2 HEAL Research Centre, Manchester Metropolitan University, Crewe, United Kingdom. 3 Medical and Scientific Department, International Paralympic Committee, Bonn, Germany. 4 Postdoc, HEAL Research Centre, Manchester Metropolitan University, Crewe, United Kingdom. 5 Professor in Sport, Faculty of Kinesiology and Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Heverlee, Belgium. 6 Masters Candidate, Faculty of Kinesiology and Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Heverlee, Belgium. 7 PhD Candidate, Institute of Training Science and Sport Informatics, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany. 8 Postdoc, School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Queensland, Australia. Key Words (5–8) Swimming Classification, Paralympics, swimming performances, impairments Abstract/Summary [this will be used for indexing services and does not appear with article] Swimming is one of the inaugural sports within the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The key difference between the Olympic and Paralympic games being the classification system. The aim of this study was to investigate how effective the current classification system creates clearly differentiated Paralympic competition classes, based on performance time for all swimming strokes and events. Based on the performance characteristics of swimmers within the current classification system the relationship between impairment and swimming performance is inconsistent, potentially disadvantaging some athletes. Appropriate sports medicine tests are required for the development of an evidence-based swimming classification system. Key Points (3–5) • Paralympic swimming classification began with sports medicine driven medical based system. • The current functional classification system is a swimming-specific system that assigns and integrates athletes with eligible impairments into classes. • Based on performance characteristics of swimmers within the current classification system the relationship between swimming class and performance is inconsistent. Potentially disadvantaging some athletes. • A new evidence-based swimming classification system is currently under development, built on the knowledge from the sport medicine assessment. Introduction The sport of swimming has been part of every Paralympic program since the Games began in 1960 and is one of the most popular sports for para-athletes with a physical, visual or intellectual impairment. For all Paralympic sports, an international classification system determines athlete eligibility and the subsequent ‘grouping’ of athletes for competition. The aim of classification is to achieve fair competition by minimising the impact of an individual’s impairment on the outcome of competition so that sporting ability, skill level and training alone determine success and the final result [1]. Despite this long history of inclusion within the Paralympic Games, questions have often been raised on the effectiveness of the classification system. Indeed, the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) has mandated the development of evidence-based classification systems of classification [1], which highlights the need for a review of the current classification system for swimming. As Paralympic sport evolved from an initial medical rehabilitation program, sports medicine formed the original swimming classification system. This inaugural classification system was based purely on a medical model with athletes ‘grouped’ within five classes of impairment: (i) Athletes with an amputation; (ii) Athletes with cerebral palsy; (iii) Athletes with a spinal cord injury; (iv) Athletes with a visual impairment, and; (v) Athletes with les autres. IPC swimming introduced the Functional Classification System in 1990, which involved two forms of assessment, a sports medicine bench-test that screening the musculoskeletal function of the athlete. The philosophy of this system was to combine the previous medical assessment with sport-specific measures. This assessment involved a modified format of the traditional medical range of movement and strength assessment. The functional classification system is a sport-specific system of classification that assigns and integrates athletes with eligible impairments, predominately physical impairments, into classes in order to maintain equitable and fair competition amongst these athletes [2]. The cumulative score from these equally weighted dry-land measures would determine into which classification the athlete would be placed, as each classification was represented by a specific range of bench-test scores. This test was followed by an in-water assessment, which required the registered IPC swimming classifier to observe the athlete swim in the water, and based on this observation, if necessary, adjust the bench- test score and ultimately the final classification. This combination of medical and sport-specific assessment currently form the activity limitation tests for para swimming. The system has been in place for seven consecutive Paralympic Games from 1992 to 2016, with some modifications over time. The separate classes distinguish between the distinct arm-dominant freestyle, backstroke, and butterfly strokes; the leg-dominated breaststroke; and the individual medley, which includes all four strokes and therefore warrants its own unique classification system. Athletes rated as a 10 on the classification scale (e.g. S10, SB10, SM10) have the greatest function. Function gradually decreases (the scope of the impairment increases) as one moves closer to a 1 rating (S1, SB1, SM1). While the requirement for fairness and equity has been stipulated [3], there has been no quantitative research that has examined if the current classification system results in discrete categories of swimming performance for all events and genders for each class. To date, analysis of Paralympic swimming performance has focused on the factors that contribute to the final outcome, swimming time [4-6]. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate how effective the current classification system creates clearly differentiated Paralympic competition classes, based on performance time for all swimming strokes and events. This new knowledge provides the required evidence for the effectiveness of this important Para sport. Methodology The swim time performances for male and female medallist swimmers since the inception of the current functional classification system were obtained from six major competitions, the • 1992 (Barcelona), • 1996 (Atlanta), • 2000 (Sydney), • 2004 (Athens), • 2008 (Beijing) and • 2012 (London) Paralympic and Olympic games. The swim time performance for the male and female Olympic swimmers in corresponding events provided a benchmark comparison. In total, 2,370 race performance times were investigated, with all data downloaded from official, publicly accessible swimming and sporting websites (www.ipc- swimming.org, www.databaseolympics.com). The swim times for male and female medallists in the Paralympic classes and the corresponding swim times for the three Olympic medallists in the following events were recorded: • the 50 m, 100 m and 400 m freestyle, • the 100 m backstroke, • the 100 m breaststroke, • the 100 m butterfly and • the 200 m individual medley. These events were analysed as they were common to both Paralympic and Olympic games. As the data was publicly available and de-identified human ethics approval was not required. To determine if there were clear differences between performances in each class, the mean swimming speeds (m/s) for Paralympic performances were expressed as a percentage of the corresponding Olympic performance. This percentage index allowed for a uniform comparison of race performance between classes, events and genders. Statistical analysis was performed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, version 17.0). Normality of distribution of data was confirmed using a Shapiro-Wilk test. The raw swim times and percentage indices of classes were compared for each sex and event using a one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with an alpha value of 0.05. Bonferroni post hoc analysis was used to determine the source of statistical significance when required. A paired sample t-test was used to compare each mean percentage index to a predicted fixed percentage variable. Based on analysis of the percentage indices, this arbitrary fixed variable was set at 85% for class S10 and decreased by 5% for each class down to 45% for class S2. For the classes of visually impaired athletes, (S11, S12 and S13), the arbitrary fixed variable was set at 90% for class 13 and decreased by 5% for each class down to 80% for Class 11. The assignment of this fixed variable was subjective, with the goal of creating equal differences between the classes. Results Of a total of 128 mean raw times across the classes and events, 58 (45%) were found to have no significant difference to their adjacent higher class (Table 1). Of the classes with a physical impairment (S2 to S10) a total of 38 out of 86 (44%) mean values across classes and events were found to have no significant difference in mean
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2016 06 Candidate PDF.Indd
    I voted. Have you? 2016 IPC Athletes’ Council elections The candidates #ProudParalympian Who is the IPC Athletes’ Council? The IPC Athletes’ Council is the collective voice of Paralympic athletes within the IPC and the greater Paralympic Movement. As the liaison between IPC decision-makers and Paralympic athletes, the IPC Athletes’ Council works to provide effective input into decision-making at all levels of the organisa- tion. To this end, the IPC Athletes’ Council works to ensure effective athlete representation on all IPC committees and commissions as well as to create other opportunities for athlete representation both within and outside the IPC. For example, the IPC Athletes’ Council enjoys cross representation with the IOC Athletes’ Commission. 2016 IPC Athletes’ Council elections Elections for the six summer sport representatives on the Athletes’ Council will take place between 5 and 16 September, in the #ProudParalympian space of the Athletes’ Dining Hall in the Paralympic Village. All “Aa” accredited athletes are entitled to vote. Athletes must vote for six candidates (not more not less). The IPC Electoral Commission is composed of the following individuals: ▪ Linda Mastandrea (IPC Legal and Ethics Committee Chairperson) – Electoral Commission Chairperson ▪ Mark Copeland (IPC Legal and Ethics Committee Member) ▪ Martin Mansell (former Chairperson IPC Athletes’ Council) To cast your vote, you simply need to: 1. Show your accreditation card at the voting station. Your card will be checked in the Voting Registration System and it will be checked that you are eligible to vote. 2. In the voting booth, follow the instructions of the electronic voting system. Please note that athletes who require assistance may select an assistant of their choice to complete the voting process.
    [Show full text]
  • Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games
    TOKYO 2020 PARALYMPIC GAMES QUALIFICATION REGULATIONS REVISED EDITION, APRIL 2021 INTERNATIONAL PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE 2 CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games Programme Overview 3. General IPC Regulations on Eligibility 4. IPC Redistribution Policy of Vacant Qualification Slots 5. Universality Wild Cards 6. Key Dates 7. Archery 8. Athletics 9. Badminton 10. Boccia 11. Canoe 12. Cycling (Track and Road) 13. Equestrian 14. Football 5-a-side 15. Goalball 16. Judo 17. Powerlifting 18. Rowing 19. Shooting 20. Swimming 21. Table Tennis 22. Taekwondo 23. Triathlon 24. Volleyball (Sitting) 25. Wheelchair Basketball 26. Wheelchair Fencing 27. Wheelchair Rugby 28. Wheelchair Tennis 29. Glossary 30. Register of Updates INTERNATIONAL PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE 3 INTRODUCTION These Qualification Regulations (Regulations) describe in detail how athletes and teams can qualify for the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games in each of the twenty- two (22) sports on the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games Programme (Games Programme). It provides to the National Paralympic Committees (NPCs), to National Federations (NFs), to sports administrators, coaches and to the athletes themselves the conditions that allow participation in the signature event of the Paralympic Movement. These Regulations present: • an overview of the Games Programme; • the general IPC regulations on eligibility; • the specific qualification criteria for each sport (in alphabetical order); and • a glossary of the terminology used throughout the Regulations. STRUCTURE OF SPORT-SPECIFIC QUALIFICATION
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Next Generation Sequencing to Study the Environmental Mycobiome and Its Potential Health Effects
    The use of next generation sequencing to study the environmental mycobiome and its potential health effects Emma Marczylo Bioaerosols – June 2017 Overview • Brief Background: • Why are CRCE interested in fungal bioaerosols? • Mycobiome analysis: • Why use next generation sequencing? • Ongoing work • What is the current focus of CRCE’s bioaerosol research? 2 Bioaerosols – June 2017 Why bioaerosols? • Respiratory health/toxicology a big focus within our department & bioaerosols represent a current respiratory health concern 3 Bioaerosols – June 2017 Why bioaerosols? • Common sources relevant to public health 4 Bioaerosols – June 2017 Why bioaerosols? • Public concern over health effects of living near composting and intensive farming sites • Systematic reviews on exposures and health outcomes related to bioaerosol emissions from composting facilities (published 2015*) or intensive farming (ongoing) in collaboration with SAHSU • Evidence on both exposure assessment and health effects are limited • A big unknown is the microbial composition of such bioaerosols *Pearson et al, 2015, J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev,18:43-69 5 Bioaerosols – June 2017 Why fungi? Normally die rapidly due to water evaporation, although increased humidity and clumping can prolong survival • Can remain viable for much longer periods, even at low humidity & high/low temperatures • Much less known about the fungal composition of bioaerosols (and other samples) • Fungi linked with development and exacerbation of asthma symptoms 6 Bioaerosols – June 2017 Mycobiome
    [Show full text]
  • Framework for In-Field Analyses of Performance and Sub-Technique Selection in Standing Para Cross-Country Skiers
    sensors Article Framework for In-Field Analyses of Performance and Sub-Technique Selection in Standing Para Cross-Country Skiers Camilla H. Carlsen 1,*, Julia Kathrin Baumgart 1, Jan Kocbach 1,2, Pål Haugnes 1 , Evy M. B. Paulussen 1,3 and Øyvind Sandbakk 1 1 Centre for Elite Sports Research, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway; [email protected] (J.K.B.); [email protected] (J.K.); [email protected] (P.H.); [email protected] (E.M.B.P.); [email protected] (Ø.S.) 2 NORCE Norwegian Research Centre AS, 5008 Bergen, Norway 3 Faculty of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +47-452-40-788 Abstract: Our aims were to evaluate the feasibility of a framework based on micro-sensor technology for in-field analyses of performance and sub-technique selection in Para cross-country (XC) skiing by using it to compare these parameters between elite standing Para (two men; one woman) and able- bodied (AB) (three men; four women) XC skiers during a classical skiing race. The data from a global navigation satellite system and inertial measurement unit were integrated to compare time loss and selected sub-techniques as a function of speed. Compared to male/female AB skiers, male/female Para skiers displayed 19/14% slower average speed with the largest time loss (65 ± 36/35 ± 6 s/lap) Citation: Carlsen, C.H.; Kathrin found in uphill terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Indicators of Hydric Soils
    United States Department of Field Indicators of Agriculture Natural Resources Hydric Soils in the Conservation Service United States In cooperation with A Guide for Identifying and Delineating the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Hydric Soils, Version 8.2, 2018 Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils Version 8.2, 2018 (Including revisions to versions 8.0 and 8.1) United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Edited by L.M. Vasilas, Soil Scientist, NRCS, Washington, DC; G.W. Hurt, Soil Scientist, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; and J.F. Berkowitz, Soil Scientist, USACE, Vicksburg, MS ii In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
    [Show full text]
  • Instrument Rating ‒ Airplane Airman Certification Standards
    FAA-S-ACS-8B (with Change 1) U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Instrument Rating ‒ Airplane Airman Certification Standards June 2018 Flight Standards Service Washington, DC 20591 Acknowledgments The U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Office of Safety Standards, Regulatory Support Division, Airman Testing Branch, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125 developed this Airman Certification Standards (ACS) document with the assistance of the aviation community. The FAA gratefully acknowledges the valuable support from the many individuals and organizations who contributed their time and expertise to assist in this endeavor. Availability This ACS is available for download from www.faa.gov. Please send comments regarding this document using the following link to the Airman Testing Branch Mailbox. Material in FAA-S-ACS-8B will be effective June 11, 2018. All previous editions of the Instrument Rating – Airplane Airman Certification Standards will be obsolete as of this date for airplane applicants. i Foreword The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has published the Instrument Rating – Airplane Airman Certification Standards (ACS) document to communicate the aeronautical knowledge, risk management, and flight proficiency standards for the instrument rating in the airplane category, single-engine land and sea; and multiengine land and sea classes. This ACS incorporates and supersedes FAA-S-ACS-8A Instrument Rating – Airplane Airman Certification Standards. The FAA views the ACS as the foundation of its transition to a more integrated and systematic approach to airman certification. The ACS is part of the Safety Management System (SMS) framework that the FAA uses to mitigate risks associated with airman certification training and testing.
    [Show full text]
  • Rev Bras Cineantropomhum
    Rev Bras Cineantropom Hum original article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1980-0037.2017v19n2p196 Sport classification for athletes with visual impairment and its relation with swimming performance Classificação esportiva para atletas com deficiência visual e sua relação com o desempenho na natação Elaine Cappellazzo Souto1,2 Leonardo dos Santos Oliveira1 Claudemir da Silva Santos2 Márcia Greguol1 Abstract – The medical classification (MC) adopted for swimmers with vision visual impairment (VI) does not clearly elucidate the influence of vision loss on performance. In a documentary research, the final time in the 50-, 100- and 400-m freestyle events and MC (S11, S12 and S13) of national (n = 40) and international (n = 72) elite swimmers was analyzed. The analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and Spearman’s correlation with 95% confidence (P < 0.05) and Cohen’s d was calculated. There was a large effect of MC on the final time in the 50-m (P = 0.034, d = 1.55) for national ath- letes and in the 50-m (P = 0.001, d = 2.64), 100-m (P = 0.001, d = 3.01) and 400-m (P = 0.001, d = 2.88) for international athletes. S12 and S13 classes were faster compared to S11 class for all international events, but only in the 50-m for the national event (P < 0.05). It was found a strong negative relationship between the final time and MC for international athletes (Spearman’s Rho ≥ 0.78). There was a significant influence of MC on the performance of swimmers in freestyle races, especially in international swimmers.
    [Show full text]
  • Editorial Style from a to Z April 2012
    Contents A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z London 2012 Editorial style from A to Z April 2012 The aim of this editorial style guide is to If you are giving this guide to anyone Introduction help everyone write about London 2012 externally, please inform LOCOG’s with clarity and consistency. The guide Editorial Services team or the ODA’s includes practical information to ensure Marketing team so we can let them writers prepare accurate content in the know when it is reissued. If you have most suitable style. any queries that are not covered by the guide, please let us know so we The guide is arranged alphabetically for can include them in future editions. ease of use, with simple navigational tools to help you find what you’re looking Working together, we will develop for. Clicking on the letters across the top effective and accessible content that of every page will take you to the first will help make London 2012 an page of each section. In addition, each incredible experience for all audiences. entry on the contents page is a link, and there are cross-references with links to other sections throughout the guide. As our organisation develops, so our style guide needs to be flexible and adaptable. For this reason, we will be regularly updating this document. Please ensure that you have the latest version. This document and the official Emblems of the London 2012 Games are © London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Limited 2007–2012.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of Disabled Athletes: (Dis)Empowering the Paralympic
    The Tail is Wagging the Dog: Body Culture, Classification and the Paralympic Movement For consideration for the special issue of Ethnography on physical culture Submitted by Dr. P. David Howe Academic Associate Peter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport Lecturer in the Sociology of Sport School of Sport and Exercise Sciences Loughborough University Loughborough UK LE11 3TU http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/sses/contact/staff/pdh.html ph. +44 (0)1509 226389 fax. +44 (0)1509 226301 [email protected] 1 Abstract. The rules and regulations regarding the classification process through which athletes must be vetted to determine eligibility for Paralympic competition have been transformed drastically over the last two decades. A complex classification system initially developed by the International Organizations of Sport for the Disabled (IOSD) has been the distinctive feature of the Paralympic movement over this period. Key consideration must be given to the equitable nature of any classification system imposed by the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) in order to comply with the ideology of Paralympism. Paralympism is manifest in the dictum of the Paralympic movement ‘empower, inspire and achieve’. Using ethnographic data obtained while a Paralympic athlete this paper explores recent debates within the sport of athletics surrounding classification. This is achieved by highlighting the process of classification and how as a result of this process some bodies are celebrated and others are not within a sporting culture established as a ghetto for imperfection. KEY WORDS: Paralympism, ethics, classification, athletics, habitus This paper highlights the importance of body culture in the transforming of the Paralympic movement by examining data collected ethnographically by an anthropologist who was both athlete and administrator within elite sporting practice for the disabled1.
    [Show full text]
  • Para Swimming Records Short Course As At
    Scottish National Para-Swimming Records Short Course (25m) Mens Classification Time Name Representation Date Venue 50m FREESTYLE S1 VACANT S2 01:08.77 Jim ANDERSON Broxburn ASC 26/08/2004 Manchester 01:08.77 Jim ANDERSON Broxburn ASC 19/04/2008 Glenrothes S3 00:55.55 Kenny CAIRNS 23/10/2005 Sheffield S4 00:47.77 Paul JOHNSTON 26/04/1997 Glenrothes S5 00:36.06 Andrew Mullen City of Glasgow ST 11/11/2017 Sheffield S6 00:39.82 Alasdair McARTHUR Helensburgh ASC 10/12/2005 Glenrothes S7 00:31.20 Andrew LINDSAY INCAS 07/11/2004 Sheffield S8 00:28.08 Sean FRASER Warrender Baths 22/11/2009 Sheffield S9 00:27.58 Stefan HOGGAN Carnegie SC 13/12/2013 Edinburgh S10 00:26.59 Oliver Carter University of Stirling 21/09/2019 Glasgow S11 00:29.74 Jim MUIRHEAD BBS record S12 00:24.37 Stephen Clegg City of Sunderland 07/12/2018 Edinburgh S13 00:25.23 Stephen CLEGG East Lothian ST 25/10/2015 Glenrothes S14 00:24.94 Louis Lawlor City of Glasgow ST 08/12/2018 Edinburgh 100m FREESTYLE S1 VACANT S2 02:24.63 Jim ANDERSON Broxburn ASC 03/11/2007 Sheffield S3 01:58.05 Kenny CAIRNS 22/10/2005 Sheffield S4 01:46.86 Paul JOHNSTON 30/10/1999 Sheffield S5 01:18.26 Andrew MULLEN REN96 22/11/2014 Manchester S6 01:31.89 Alasdair McARTHUR Helensburgh ASC 22/10/2005 Sheffield S7 01:08.00 Andrew LINDSAY INCAS 03/11/2007 Sheffield S8 01:00.64 Sean FRASER Warrender Baths 20/11/2010 Sheffield S9 01:00.35 Stefan HOGGAN Carnegie SC 24/11/2012 Sheffield S10 00:57.27 Oliver Carter University of Stirling 11/11/2018 Sheffield S11 01:05.46 Jim MUIRHEAD BBS record S12 00:52.31 Stephen
    [Show full text]
  • Conditions-BPSIM Inc. WPS World Series 2021
    BRITISH PARA-SWIMMING INTERNATIONAL MEET (50M) Incorporating the 2021 World Para Swimming World Series 8th to 11th April 2021 CONDITIONS MEET CONDITIONS - BRITISH PARA-SWIMMING INTERNATIONAL MEET (50m). 1. General Conditions a. The British Para Swimming Management Team reserves full powers over the British Para- Swimming International Meet (50m). The Meet Director (or nominated substitute) will be the Promoters representative at the event. b. The Competition shall be held under World Para Swimming (WPS) Rules and Regulations (excepting Protest fees) together with any changes and or additional conditions (printed in the Meet Information). Where WPS Rules do not provide (e.g. Health & Safety Regulations or Child Protection Guidelines) the requirements of Swim England shall apply to events held in England. c. This Meet is a WPS Approved Competition. d. WPS International Classifications will be offered. 2. Protests a. WPS Rule 10.12 governs the management of Technical Protests. Whilst for this event the WPS procedure contained within will be followed, the fees referred to in rules 10.12.2 d and 10.12.6.2 shall in both cases by replaced by the protest fee and appeal fee each being £25. 3. Eligibility a. S1-S10 - All competitors must have WPS Classification, which is held on the WPS Classification Database at the time of entry, except for those on the list for classification immediately preceding the competition. b. S11-S13 - All competitors must have a WPS Classification, which is held on the WPS Classification Database at the time of entry. c. S14 - All competitors must have an authorised INAS-FID or WPS Classification, which is held on the WPS Classification Database at the time of entry.
    [Show full text]
  • Swimming Into Olympism and Saving Lives
    SWIMMING INTO OLYMPISM AND SAVING LIVES Stacy L. Schaetz Master dissertation submitted to the professional body for the partial fulfillment of obligations for the awarding of a post-graduate title in the Post-graduate Programme, "Organization and Management of Olympic Events" of the University of the Peloponnese, in the branch of Olympic Education. Sparta 2016 Approved by the Professor body: 1st Supervisor: Elia Chatzigianni Prof. UNIVERSITY OF PELOPONNESE, GREECE 2nd Supervisor: Kostas Georgiadis Prof. UNIVERSITY OF PELOPONNESE, GREECE 3rd Supervisor: Ourania Vrondou, Prof. UNIVERSITY. OF PELOPONNESE, GREECE Copyright © Stacy Lorraine Schaetz, 2016. All rights reserved. Swimming into Olympism and Saving Lives CONTENTS CONTENTS …………………………………………………………………………..i SUMMARY…….……………………………………………………………..............iii ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………..iv INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………...…..1 CHAPTER I -SWIMMING: AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE……………………7 Gender Equality……………………………………………………...……………….10 Swimming Pools………………………………………………………………………12 CHAPTER II-DROWNING: A SILENT KILLER……………………………….......15 Drowning Fears…………………………………………………………………….....23 The Law of Buoyancy…………………………………………………………………27 CHAPTER III-SWIMMING: DIVERSITY IN AQUATICS …………….…………29 The Color of Swimming……………………………………..………………………..29 Paralympic Swimming ……………………………………………………..………...34 CHAPTER IV-SWIMMING: EDUCATION…………………………….……….....36 Privatized Swim Education ………………………………………………………......39 Public School Education ……………………………………………………………..41 Every Child a Swimmer ………………………………………………………………44
    [Show full text]